I'm still covering Cardinals spring training in Jupiter, but that doesn't mean I'm ignoring the other sports back in St. Louis. So with your permission, here's a quick take on the Rams and Rodger Saffold...

Saffold is a good player. And a good guy. And he's a versatile player, capable of playing guard and both tackle spots depending on where the Rams need him. And there's no question that the Rams' offensive line needs retooling, and with some likely salary-cap related departures forthcoming, the immediate O-line depth is an issue. But let's not get get carried away here; as a guard Saffold isn't exactly, say, John “Hog” Hannah. (Google him, kids.)

Saffold's durability is a recurring issue; he has started only 28 of a possible 48 games over the past three seasons. And Saffold has departed several games early with an injury after starting.

Are the Rams prepared to overpay for Saffold because of their concerns over depth? Are they prepared to overpay for insurance in case Jake Long (knee) won't be fully rehabbed in time to plug back in at left tackle early in the regular season? Are the Rams willing to overpay simply because they have more money to work with after the league's salary cap was raised to $133 million per team? Are the Rams willing to overpay during an exclusive negotiation window just to keep Saffold off the free-agent market?

I realize the offensive line is under duress, and this is a key area of the team. I do appreciate the tough spot GM Les Snead and head coach Jeff Fisher are in. But as a matter of principle, is there ever a sensible reason to overpay a guy who has played an average of about 9 of the team's 16 games each season since 2011? Saffold played 1,068 snaps from scrimmage as a rookie in 2010. Here's his snap count, in order, over the past three seasons: 618 ... 621 ... 557.

The Rams already are coping with a payroll top heavy with several huge contracts. It would be silly to get jammed up even more by investing in a veteran that has had a difficult time staying upright, and on the field.

By the way, I'm not assuming the Rams will overpay. I don't know what they will offer. I don't know what Saffold is demanding. I think it would be OK, generally speaking to overpay him a little. But if the Rams decide to take a pass on a big overpay here, I don't have a problem with that. For 25+ years I've been hearing NFL personnel types tell me "You can always find guards." And if Saffold leaves and the Rams have some money to spend, they'll be able to sign a guard.

Thanks for reading ...

-Bernie

-03-04-2014

RealRam

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Quote:

Originally Posted by R8rh8rmike

Ram Bytes: Don't go crazy on contract for Saffold

9 hours ago • Bernie Miklasz

"You can always find guards." And if Saffold leaves and the Rams have some money to spend, they'll be able to sign a guard.

A good guard in FA to replace RS. Okay but ... who? Who. ;)

-03-05-2014

Fortuninerhater

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

When Jeff Fisher says he thinks Saffold will be an outstanding guard in this league, I take that to mean he thinks he'll be pro-bowl caliber.

If that's the case, the Rams will have to pay him as such, particularly with the extra cap room.

I think 6 to 6.5 million a year is a good signing, but Saffold may have other ideas in which case, it'll make it difficult to retain him.

-03-05-2014

laram0

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Saffold's ability to play numerous positions is what keeps me wanting him back. I know he has had injury issues but he's still an important part of our O-line. I don't want to overpay for him unless it's only a little. I guess the question in my mind is does RS want to play for a team that's on the rise? Only he knows the answer to that question.

-03-05-2014

mde8352gorams

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

I agree with the point that we shouldn't overpay him but for a little as he has some value to us over a new OG. I think our best asset to retaining him is Jeff Fisher as a HC. He is the type of coach players love to play for and that may not be available to Rodger elsewhere. With the release of Finnegan or at minimum a restructure that gives us a bit of latitude. I hope we can keep him for the right price.

Go Rams!

-03-06-2014

tomahawk247

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

If we can always find guards, why have we struggled so much, especially at LG? Sure we have plugged guys in there, but noone has set the world alight

-03-06-2014

Nick

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Sure, he's a great guard... when he plays. But he hasn't played more than 10 games since he was a rookie. This reminds me to some degree of the Danny Amendola situation. Good player, but how can you commit large money to him over a multi-year deal with his injury history?

My bet is that some team desperate for a left tackle will probably shell out some money, and if I'm Rodger, I'm willing to test the market and try to find that team. If I'm the Rams, I'm not willing to pay the kind of money that would keep Rodger from doing that.

-03-06-2014

macrammer

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

Sure, he's a great guard... when he plays. But he hasn't played more than 10 games since he was a rookie. This reminds me to some degree of the Danny Amendola situation. Good player, but how can you commit large money to him over a multi-year deal with his injury history?

My bet is that some team desperate for a left tackle will probably shell out some money, and if I'm Rodger, I'm willing to test the market and try to find that team. If I'm the Rams, I'm not willing to pay the kind of money that would keep Rodger from doing that.

I think this is what is happening. Rams have most likely made their offer and now Rodger will test market. He will find a team that will pay him LT money. I would like him back but agree with Nick.....Not willing to pay the kind of money that would keep him rom shopping.

-03-06-2014

mde8352gorams

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

This thought occurred to me and I may be over-thinking this matter, but I suspect a big reason the Rams feel the need to re-sign Rodger is that it would allow them to avoid spending a 1st round pick on a OT.

As much as we on this site feel it's so important for the Rams to select Matthews, Robinson or even Lewan, I'm feeling Jeff and Les would prefer to spend that high 1st round pick on a difference maker. By that I'm alluding to Mike Evans, who until the Combine hadn't caught my attention as both a big physical WR, but also a competent route runner that can make contested catches and is fast enough. Consider his skills going up against Richard Sherman, Patrick Peterson and Donte Whitner. While #2 is too high, I'm betting Les Snead wants to trade down with perhaps Atlanta (J. Clowney) and maybe even again with Buffalo (K. Mack) to #9 where Evans value is on the mark. Of course if his Pro Day later this month is exceptional or bad that could change the equation.

That is my thinking about why Saffold means a lot to the Rams, not to overpay him, but to retain him at a reasonable cost and still have some cap space to pursue A. Verner. Just a theory, but I think Jeff and Les want a stud playmaker with our 1st round pick and Evans could be that guy.

Go Rams!

-03-07-2014

tomahawk247

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Quote:

Originally Posted by mde8352gorams

This thought occurred to me and I may be over-thinking this matter, but I suspect a big reason the Rams feel the need to re-sign Rodger is that it would allow them to avoid spending a 1st round pick on a OT.

As much as we on this site feel it's so important for the Rams to select Matthews, Robinson or even Lewan, I'm feeling Jeff and Les would prefer to spend that high 1st round pick on a difference maker. By that I'm alluding to Mike Evans, who until the Combine hadn't caught my attention as both a big physical WR, but also a competent route runner that can make contested catches and is fast enough. Consider his skills going up against Richard Sherman, Patrick Peterson and Donte Whitner. While #2 is too high, I'm betting Les Snead wants to trade down with perhaps Atlanta (J. Clowney) and maybe even again with Buffalo (K. Mack) to #9 where Evans value is on the mark. Of course if his Pro Day later this month is exceptional or bad that could change the equation.

That is my thinking about why Saffold means a lot to the Rams, not to overpay him, but to retain him at a reasonable cost and still have some cap space to pursue A. Verner. Just a theory, but I think Jeff and Les want a stud playmaker with our 1st round pick and Evans could be that guy.

Go Rams!

Problem with that theory is that Saffold wouldn't be a RT, but simply an OG or LT. Sure, signing Saffold could mean that if Jake Long's recovery is behind schedule that Saffold could play LT for a while and then move back to OG. But the team would still be looking at an OT in the draft to play RT for at least a season. Sure, you could get a mauling RT later on. But signing Saffold would not mean that the Rams cross OT off the list to be picked at #2 overall.

-03-07-2014

mde8352gorams

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomahawk247

Problem with that theory is that Saffold wouldn't be a RT, but simply an OG or LT. Sure, signing Saffold could mean that if Jake Long's recovery is behind schedule that Saffold could play LT for a while and then move back to OG. But the team would still be looking at an OT in the draft to play RT for at least a season. Sure, you could get a mauling RT later on. But signing Saffold would not mean that the Rams cross OT off the list to be picked at #2 overall.

My theory is totally based on Saffold playing OG which is where Jeff Fisher wants him. We have Joe Barksdale at RT and he has proven himself very capable in that role. He can improve his run blocking but he ranked among the better RT's in 2013. As for LT, if Jake Long is unable to return by game 1 then Saffold can fill that role as he did for the last game in 2103.

We're not going to take a OT in the top 10 to play RT, no team would do that unless you plan to move him to LT and we have other needs that require attention. You can always take a OT at #13 such as Taylor Lewan, if he's available.

Go Rams!

-03-07-2014

richtree

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Saffold said through his agent that he is testing the FA market.....so I doubt he will come back to Rams now unless the match teams desperate looking for Oline help.....

so 90% gone now...

-03-07-2014

RealRam

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richtree

So 90% gone now...

:disapointed: Was hoping for 50-50% at this point.

-03-08-2014

Fortuninerhater

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

Quote:

Originally Posted by mde8352gorams

This thought occurred to me and I may be over-thinking this matter, but I suspect a big reason the Rams feel the need to re-sign Rodger is that it would allow them to avoid spending a 1st round pick on a OT.

As much as we on this site feel it's so important for the Rams to select Matthews, Robinson or even Lewan, I'm feeling Jeff and Les would prefer to spend that high 1st round pick on a difference maker.

Go Rams!

So I guess that means you've been glossing over my posts for the entire offseason. Wow, that's a little disconcerting considering this is essentially what I've been saying all offseason.

Secondly, only some of you feel it's so important to select Mathews, Robinson, or Lewan. The rest of us feel sufficient upgrades to the Oline, can be made outside the first round.

-03-09-2014

TekeRam

Re: Ram Bytes: Don't Go Crazy On Contract For Saffold

At $8M per year, and a 3 year average of 600 snaps... If the Raiders get him, they'll be paying approximately $13,333 per snap for Saffold. No thanks.